iMEM task index register architecture

ABSTRACT

A computing system that includes a number of processing elements, a memory and a multi-task controller is disclosed. The memory has an interface that includes a task page mechanism with an index register. A portion of the multi-task controller also has a task page register for accessing the memory via another interface. The task page mechanism provides access to the memory by the host processor. The index register can be loaded by either the address or data bus of the host processor. In one embodiment, the task page mechanism includes a comparator and a counter to facilitate a polling scan of the status of the various tasks in the memory.

CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS

This application claims priority to prior U.S. Provisional PatentApplication, Ser. No. 60/540,671, filed Jan. 29, 2004 and titled“INTELLIGENT MEMORY DEVICE ARCHITECTURE,” which application is herebyincorporated by reference into the instant application.

This application is related to U.S. patent application Ser. No.10/831,649, filed Apr. 23, 2004 and titled “INTELLIGENT MEMORY DEVICE,”docket number 372614-04301, which application is hereby incorporated byreference into the instant application.

This application is related to U.S. patent application Ser. No.10/938,990, filed on Sep. 9, 2004 and titled “INTELLIGENT MEMORY DEVICEWITH ASCII REGISTERS,” docket number 372614-04401, which application ishereby incorporated by reference into the instant application.

This application is related to U.S. patent application Ser. No.10/957,431, filed on Sep. 30, 2004 and titled “INTELLIGENT MEMORY DEVICEWITH WAKEUP FEATURE,” docket number 372614-04501, which application ishereby incorporated by reference into the instant application.

This application is related to U.S. patent application Ser. No.10/979,865, filed on Nov. 1, 2004, and titled “INTELLIGENT MEMORY DEVICEWITH VARIABLE SIZE TASK ARCHITECTURE”, docket number 372614-04601, whichapplication is hereby incorporated by reference into the instantapplication.

This application is related to U.S. patent application Ser. No.11/004,652, filed on Dec. 3, 2004, and titled “INTELLIGENT MEMORY DEVICECLOCK DISTRIBUTION ARCHITECTURE”, docket number 372614-04701, whichapplication is hereby incorporated by reference into the instantapplication.

This application is related to U.S. patent application Ser. No.11/022,288, filed on Dec. 23, 2004, and titled “INTELLIGENT MEMORYDEVICE MULTILEVEL ASCII INTERPRETER”, docket number 372614-04801, whichapplication is hereby incorporated by reference into the instantapplication.

This application is related to U.S. patent application Ser. No. ______,filed on Jan. 27, 2005, and titled “IMEM RECONFIGURABLE ARCHITECTURE”,docket number 372614-04901, which application is hereby incorporated byreference into the instant application.

This application is related to U.S. patent application Ser. No. ______,filed on Jan. 27, 2005, and titled “IMEM ASCII FPU ARCHITECTURE”, docketnumber 372614-05001, which application is hereby incorporated byreference into the instant application.

This application is related to U.S. patent application Ser. No. ______,filed on Jan. 27, 2005, and titled “IMEM ASCII OPERATOR ARCHITECTURE FOREXECUTING SYSTEM OPERATORS AND PROCESSING DATA OPERATORS”, docket number372614-05201, which application is hereby incorporated by reference intothe instant application.

This application is related to U.S. patent application Ser. No. ______,filed on Jan. 27, 2005, and titled “IMEM ASCII INDEX REGISTERS”, docketnumber 372614-05301, which application is hereby incorporated byreference into the instant application.

FIELD OF THE INVENTION

The present invention relates generally to computer design and computerarchitecture and more specifically to a new class of multi-tasking,multi-processor systems.

DESCRIPTION OF THE RELATED ART

The three major problems facing computer designers today involve (i)memory latency; (ii) multi-processor co-ordination; and (iii) compilercomplexity. Intelligence, in the classical computer architecture, islocated in a Central Processor Unit (CPU) or CPU array, while workingstorage is located in non-intelligent memory devices. Over time avicious cycle has evolved in which operating system designers haveexpected faster processors and larger working memories and have designedoperating systems (OSs) and associated compilers to take advantage ofthese improved processors and memories.

However, a dichotomy exists between random logic gates of a CPU andarrays of logic storage gates in a memory, because each physicallyevolved in specialized manner, due to different manufacturingoptimizations. The interface between logic and memory limits currentprocessor architecture. Attempts to minimize this problem have drivenboth CPU and memory design for a decade or more. Approaches to thisinclude: (i) cache memories and pipelining; (ii) faster interfaces, suchas those used in RDRAM or SRAM; (iii) on-chip memory integration; (iv)use of multi-threaded processors; (v) use of co-processors; and (vi)language improvements.

Each of these approaches is discussed below. Memory latency argumentsfocus on single processors, but apply to multi-processors, since memorylatency is typically independent of the number of processors accessingmemory.

Pipelining

Because memory technology and processor/logic manufacturing technologyevolved separately, large capacity memories cannot be integrated withhigh speed processors on one die, so the two have classically beenpackaged separately and wired together. The distances and capacitancesassociated with this wiring involve access delays many times thoseinvolved in on-chip access. An early approach to this problem involved“pipelining,” in which several registers were inserted in the path andattempts were made to keep filling the pipeline while the processordrained the pipeline. A problem with this approach is branching whereinthe pipeline must be flushed and refilled at the branch target location.

Cache Memories

Pipelines evolved into on-chip cache memories to provide much fasteraccess. By operating from cache memory, the processor can operate atfull speed, until a branch occurs to a location not in cache. Probablythe most prevalent strategy today is multi-level cache, with the fastestcaches being the smallest and closest to the processor. For example, theIntel Itanium's level-three (L3) cache memory is too small to store lotsof large pointers so it uses up to 32 Mbytes of level-two (L2) cache.Very large operating systems (OSs) try to run code from the same baseaddress, causing aliasing problems in caches and flushes. In general,processor performance is limited by memory latency. It has been pointedout that, in the future, at 5 to 10 GHz CPU operating frequencies, aDRAM access is several thousand clock cycles. What is a processor to doduring these cycles?

Of course, the obvious answer is make memory devices faster. Yet as longas the CPU and memory technologies differ, the devices will be onseparate die. At high speeds, parallel busses cannot remainsynchronized, so super high frequencies are used in a single serialchannel. For example, the Rambus XDR™ interface is projected to hit the6 Gigabit rate by 2006. Nevertheless, memory latencies will never bezero and the problem will not be completely solved via faster memory.

On-Chip Memory Integration

With the inability to solve the “off-chip latency problem” one mightexpect that “on-chip” memory provides a solution. However, due to theseparate evolutionary paths taken by CPU and memory manufacturingtechnologies, this is unlikely to occur soon. The “off-chip” approachprovides the ability to use as little or as much memory as isappropriate, unlike the “on-chip” solution where memory size is fixed.Although, in theory, many different sizes could be manufactured, themulti-million dollar, exponentially increasing costs of masks arguesagainst this, even if the technology were feasible. System-on-Chip (SOC)devices do use on-chip, generally distributed, memory, however thesedevices are typically designed for cameras, cell phones, or otherapplications in which a fixed size of memory is feasible. SOC-relevantmeasures of optimality tend to be power consumption, not high speed, sothis does not solve the general purpose CPU problem, which is based onthe fact that CPU address space can always exceed on-chip memorycapacity.

Multi-Threaded Processors

Another architectural approach to latency is multi-threading, in whichprograms are treated as ‘threads’ or loci of execution that areessentially independent of each other. When one program stalls due tomemory latency, the CPU switches to execute a different thread while thefirst thread's cache is being refilled in an attempt to mask the effectsof memory latency. Not every one agrees with this approach. Intel addedmulti-threading to the 386 architecture, but 386-compatiblemanufacturers, such as VIA and Transmeta, argue: “Multi-threading is anadmission you can't keep the pipeline full” and Advanced Micro Devices,another 386 manufacturer says: “ . . . putting multiple cores on a diewill become a more important trend than multi-threading individualprocessors.”

Some CPU manufacturers have introduced hardware multi-threading. Forexample, MIPs offers two approaches: In the first, a hardware threadmanager controls which thread is running on the CPU, while the secondapproach uses application-level thread support, in which the operatingsystem must keep track of the threads. The latter is compatible withthread-friendly languages such as Java, while the first may be moreappropriate to programs that do not understand the thread concept.Automatically switching between threads can clobber shared resources,such as Floating-Point Computation Units, whose state typically must besaved and restored when task-switches occur. This assumes thatcomputational resources are required only for the single thread, sincetrue multi-tasking use of multi-register FPUs typically require completeregister bank save/restore upon each task switch, and thus would appearto defeat hardware multi-threading. MIPS implies this is true by arguingthat DSP hardware coprocessors are used, not because CPU instructionscannot perform the computations, but because single thread CPUs, evenwith real time OS, cannot guarantee hard real-time deadlines.Multi-threading allows one thread to receive a minimum percentage of CPUcycles, such that the critical task essentially runs its own virtualCPU.

Another manufacturer, Ubicom, uses a proprietary 32-bit general-purposeprocessor with hardware support for up to eight threads, multipleregister sets, a hardware Scheduler unit and hardware allocation tableto drive the Scheduler unit. By switching between register sets, thedevice achieves zero cycle context switching. Instead of saving andrestoring register contents for each thread, each thread simply workswith its own dedicated register set. Ubicom does not include FPUs, sothe associated context switch problems are avoided.

Use of Coprocessors

Yet another approach to memory latency is via the use of co-processors.These have classically been I/O-oriented such as UARTs and USBcontrollers, Ethernet controllers, digital signal processors, diskcontrollers and the like.

Several recent approaches to off-CPU processing do not relate to I/O.The NanoAmp JAVA Accelerator, a coprocessor that executes JAVA bytecodes, sits between the processor and memory and allows an immediatepass-through mode to allow CPU access to memory. When the accelerator isoperating, it feeds the host CPU instructions to keep it occupied in apolling loop, monitoring the status of the coprocessor. This closelycoupled mechanism is appropriate to a CPU executing a Java program, andvery little else, since a polling processor is doing no useful work.

In contrast, the Cybernetic Micro Systems P-51 device provides a memoryinterface to an 8051 CPU that is seen as memory by the host CPU, whilerunning general purpose programs in support of the host (see U.S. Pat.No. 6,021,453, titled “MICROPROCESSOR UNIT FOR USE IN AN INDEFINITELYEXTENSIBLE CHAIN OF PROCESSORS WITH SELF-PROPAGATION OF CODE AND DATAFROM THE HOST EEND, SELF-DETERMINATION OF CHAIN LENGTH AND ID, (AND WITHMULTIPLE ORTHOGONAL CHANNELS AND COORDINATION PORTS”, and U.S. Pat. No.6,219,736, titled “UNIVERSAL SERIAL BUS (USB) RAM ARCHITECTURE FOR USEWITH MICROCOMPUTERS VIA AN INTERFACE OPTIMIZED FOR INTEGRATED SERVICESDIGITAL NETWORK (ISDN)”). The advantage is that memory now becomesuseful for processing data, not just storing data. The coupling betweenhost CPU and coprocessor can be coupling via an interrupt signal line ormemory mailboxes and is not limited to Java or any other type of programor program language. Programs must be specifically written to takeadvantage of such a coprocessor.

In a similar vein, Micron Technology has described the “Yukon,” an arrayof memory Processing Elements to off-load the CPU. The pilot chip hasarithmetic logic units with registers to improve a software pipeline tomove data between the ALUs and on-chip DRAM. The Micron “Yukon” andCybernetics “P-51” devices are the prior art believed closest to theinvention described herein.

Other Solutions

Two other approaches to the problem have been suggested by StanfordUniversity and UC Berkeley. Although Berkeley calls their approach“intelligent RAM,” this is a misnomer. They essentially integrate theCPU and RAM memory on the same die, as discussed above. “The devices arecalled IRAMs because most of the transistors on the merged chip will bedevoted to memory.” So they think of the processor as being added tomemory as opposed to the memory being added to the processor. This issemantical wordplay and has no relation to the “intelligent memoryarchitecture,” iMEM, described herein. Similarly, the Stanford approachincludes a standard (MIPs) CPU on a chip with multiple floating pointunits and supporting register files. This also falls under the “SOCon-chip integration” concept, and is unrelated to the iMEM architectureof the current invention.

Languages

The above discussion focuses on the memory latency problem. iMEM isdesigned to ameliorate this problem, and problems associated withcomputer languages, such as: Assembly, Fortran, BASIC, Pascal, APL, C,C++, Forth, Java and associated compilers.

When computers were invented, memory elements (flip/flops) typicallycost $100 per vacuum tube-based bit. Economics dictated binary encoding,as instructions were encoded and interpreted as efficiently as possible.For perspective we should note:

-   -   In 1971, the first computer-on-a-chip had about 1,500 gates;    -   In late '80s, the average ASIC size was about 10 K gates;    -   In mid '00s, the average ASIC size was about 10 M gates; and    -   In mid '00s, the current CPU size will be about 100 M gates.

Today, with millions of logic gates and memory bits available on a chipfor about $10, one must ask why binary encoding is still in use.Probably the main reason is the large number of software tools availablefor converting ASCII-coded programs into binary executables. As long asprocessors require binary executables, this is the way things will bedone. In light of this history, one might ask “why ASCII?”; the moreappropriate question is “why not ASCII?”The world-wide communicationsystem, the Internet, is ASCII based; the universal data scheme, XML, isalso ASCII; and all user programmable computers are typically programmedin ASCII (or the UNICODE superset) and then converted to binaryinstructions and/or data. Why do we need this conversion process? Codingshould, by default, be ASCII, unless there is a good reason for binaryencoding. Therefore, the preferred implementation of iMEM hardware isASCII encoded, although iMEM architecture is completely compatible witha binary implementation. The primary tool for ASCII encoded hardware isan ASCII text editor.

Computer operating systems arose from the same historical economics thatnecessitated computer languages and compilers. Early OSs managed binarycommunications and mass storage and scheduled programs for execution.Later OSs supported multi-tasking, when more than one program needed torun “simultaneously.” The same arguments that apply to ASCII vs. binaryencoding apply to multi-tasking, and again to multi-processing. Whentens of millions of gates are available for design, there is no reasonto design processors in the same way that they were designed when onlythousands of gates were available. As is described below, iMEMarchitecture is intended to address the memory latency, multi-processorcoordination, and compiler complexity problems.

BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

A system in accordance with an embodiment of the present invention is acomputing system that includes one or more processing elements, with atleast one processing element operative to interpret a first subset ofoperators and perform specified operations on data, a memory and amulti-task controller. The memory has a first interface for connectingto a host processor and a second interface and is divided into aplurality of logical partitions, including at least one task pagecontaining the state of a task. The number of processing elements andnumber of tasks are independent of each other. The first interfaceincludes a task page mechanism with an index register, the mechanismproviding access by the host processor to the memory. The multi-taskcontroller (MTC) includes a scheduler unit, a data flow unit, anexecutive unit, and a resource manager unit, with each unit coupled tothe other units. The data flow unit is configured to transfer databetween the second interface of the memory and one of either thescheduler unit, the executive unit, or resource manager unit. Thescheduler unit is coupled to the second interface of the memory andscheduler unit and the resource manager unit are each coupled to the oneor more processing elements. The resource manager unit is configured tofind an available processing element for carrying out a function of atask and to assign a processing element to a current task by providing alinkage between said available processing element and the task. Thescheduler unit is configured to select a task as the current task, toobtain the state of the current task, and select an assigned processingelement to carry out a function of the current task, the scheduler unitalso having a task page register. The executive unit is configured todecode instructions relating to a task and request the resource managerto set up a processing element to carry out a function of a task.

Computer systems typically contain a processor subsystem, one or morememory spaces, and an I/O subsystem. Multi-processor systems simplymultiply the above by an integer, with some means of coupling theprocessors. Since the 1970 Illiac-IV innumerable such systems have beenproposed and many systems have been built, yet few are well known forsolving any significant problems. There are at least two reasons for thegeneral lack of success of such specialized multi-processor systems.

First, interconnection schemes are typically complex, involving multiplepathways and/or complex switching systems, with complex physicalinterconnect and associated algorithms.

Second, programming such systems is extremely difficult. Few tools existfor unique multi-processor architecture, and the tools created forclassical architectures were designed for single-processorimplementations, thus software hurdles are significant.

A third involves the economics of scale. If only a few, or a fewhundred, such processors are to be built, they inevitably cost far morethan processors manufactured by the millions. This applies to softwareissues also. Software written for multi-processor implementations costsat least as much as commercial software developed for mass-marketprocessors, but is not amortized over millions of processors, as iscommercial software.

Intelligent Memory is subject to none of the above problems. First,intelligent memory connection to the processor is (in the simplest case)identical to non-intelligent memory, and is thus compatible with all oftoday's processors.

Second, access to intelligent memory is identical to access to normal,non-intelligent, memory and therefore uses identical processorinstructions and software.

Third, intelligent memory is subject to the same economies of scale asnormal memory, which offers some of the greatest economic scale benefitsexisting today.

Fourth, the economics of scale that apply to memories are so great thatmemories tend to become low profit commodities. Intelligent memory,because of the added value, the intelligence, should command a premium,and therefore be commercially successful.

Fifth, in the default state, the intelligence should be disabled, andthe memory should therefore be (conceptually) identical to normalmemory. This has the extreme advantage of being compatible with allcurrently existing software, while offering extraordinary capability tonew or extended software.

The chief advantage of the iMEM architecture is the distribution ofintelligence across most of the silicon in a computer system as opposedto the typical and historical case in which all intelligence resides inthe CPU and none in the memory. Note that both classical CPU/memorysystems and CPU/iMEM systems may possess intelligent I/O such as storageor communication controllers, but these are incidental to andindependent of the intelligence we are discussing.

For compute-intensive CPU operations, all data must flow from memoryinto the CPU, where the computations are performed, and the results mustthen flow back into memory. This causes the CPU/memory interface to bethe system bottleneck, as has been the case for a decade or so. A largeportion of current computer design consists of attacking this bottleneckproblem.

In compute-intensive iMEM-based systems, the data generally do not flowacross the CPU/iMEM interface, except initially, and all iMEMs can besimultaneously processing data, with occasional or appropriate resultsbeing offered to the CPU. A given memory bandwidth supports far moredata processing in an iMEM system than is the case for classical memory.The actual improvement is generally linear with respect to the number ofiMEM devices.

A further advantage is that iMEM hides its intelligence until it isspecifically requested by the CPU. Therefore startup procedures, BIOSoperations, and OS operations need not be aware that iMEM exists,providing compatibility with any and all CPU systems extant.

Typical fields of application for iMEM consist of particle-in-cellproblems such as weather models, or N-body tracking problems such asprotein folding or UAV airspace deconfliction, etc. These are the typeof problems that are currently addressed by super computers or by meshconfigurations of ordinary PCs. Super computers are very expensive, andoften of fixed capacity, and may be relatively deficient in softwaresupport/tools. In fact, many recent supercomputers are comprised ofarrays of commercial processors, and can be augmented by iMEM with nobasic architectural changes.

iMEM, unlike super computers, provides a low cost solution, which isextendable in almost unlimited fashion, with cost of system enhancementlinearly proportional to the number of iMEM devices. In addition, iMEMis closely coupled to the CPU via the standard PCI (or other) memorybus, providing orders of magnitude more speed than a mesh computernetwork, which is coupled via serial communications channels operatingtypically over miles of wiring and requiring hundreds or thousands ofPCs. The use of hundreds or thousands of iMEM devices is both lower costand higher computation speed. Additionally, the power of existing meshcomputer networks can be augmented by adding iMEM to each CPU in themesh.

iMEM requires little special software since CPU operations simplyinitialize the data registers and read results when appropriate. If theASCII iMEM option is implemented programming can be performed withtypical text editors with no compilation required.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

These and other features, aspects and advantages of the presentinvention will become better understood with regard to the followingdescription, appended claims, and accompanying drawings where:

FIG. 1A shows a CPU and classical memory;

FIG. 1B shows CPU and iMEM architecture of the present invention;

FIG. 2A shows a CPU classical memory address space;

FIG. 2B shows a CPU-iMEM address space;

FIG. 3A shows the iMEM architectural structure and subsystems;

FIG. 3B shows the inputs and outputs of the Scheduler unit;

FIG. 3C shows the inputs and outputs of the Dataflow unit;

FIG. 3D shows the inputs and outputs of the Executive unit;

FIG. 3E shows the inputs and outputs of the Resource Manager unit;

FIG. 4 shows the iMEM task/page organization;

FIG. 5 shows a suspended task being accessed by the host CPU. If notsuspended, the task executes and waits for resources and responses;

FIG. 6 shows ASCII iMEM Task Coding Structure;

FIG. 7. shows each task status register containing eight default indexregisters. The index registers are represented in ASCII code by ‘h’ . .. ‘o’;

FIG. 8 illustrates the iMEM distributed ASCII interpretationarchitecture preferred for indexed addressing operations and additionalhardware support for such index-related page addressing. Data flow pathsbetween task memory and Processing Elements are not shown;

FIG. 9 shows the iMEM configuration parameters on system page;

FIG. 10 shows an alternative iMEM data path between memory andProcessing Element that preserves iMEM task scheduling and executionarchitecture, while supporting appropriate data size;

FIG. 11 shows the iMEM ASCII code hierarchy. Native ASII code in taskcode space is interpreted by iMEM hardware. Hi-level ASCII code in taskdata space can be interpreted either by the native task code software orby appropriate Processing Element hardware;

FIG. 12 shows the ASCII name structure supporting single-character ASCIIregister names;

FIG. 13 shows iMEM ASCII code translation algorithm;

FIG. 14A shows load from data version of the iMEM Index Registerarchitecture;

FIG. 14B shows load from address version of the IMEM Index Registerarchitecture;

FIG. 15 shows the iMEM Task Index Register that provides compatibilitywith Intel 386 Global Descriptor Table architecture;

FIG. 16 shows a standalone iMEM device can support a communicationschannel and a program input subsystem in place of a host CPU;

FIG. 17A shows a standard CPU-hosted ‘vertical’ array of iMEMs;

FIG. 17B shows a P-51-like ‘horizontal’ array of iMEM devices which arePE-linked;

FIG. 18 shows an iMEM branching array topology with PE-linked iMEM tree;

FIG. 19 shows the preferred implementation of iMEM reconfigurablearchitecture which restricts reconfiguration to one or more ProcessingElements;

FIG. 20 shows the preferred iMEM clock domain distribution/topology;

FIG. 21 shows a preferred iMEM ‘wakeup’ mechanism; FIG. 22 shows theProcessing Element signals and structure;

FIG. 23 schematically shows the operation of a preferred embodiment; and

FIG. 24 shows a flow chart of the basic state transitions.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

The iMEM Structure

Common to all of the above attempts to solve the memory latency problem,except Cybernetic's and Micron's, is maintenance of the CPU-memorydichotomy, i.e., all of the intelligence is positioned in the processor,none in the memory. The invention described herein alters thisarchitecture as shown in FIG. 1B. The processor characteristics include(i) autonomous processing; (ii) local memory space(s) access; and (iii)I/O channels. The memory characteristics include (i) an address bus;(ii) a data bus; and (iii) a control bus (Read, Write, Enable, Ready,etc.). The intelligent memory characteristics include: (i) an addressbus; (ii) a data bus; (iii) a control bus; (iv) processing disabled bydefault; (v) processing enabled via the memory interface; and (vi)optional I/O channels.

The iMEM device looks like classical memory to the CPU 50 and respondsas such to the CPU address 120, control 124, and data busses 122. Withinthe iMEM, however, exists considerable intelligence 700, with access toall data stored in memory 100. iMEM intelligence can access memory data,assumed placed in memory by the CPU, and either interpret or operate 600on said data. The interpreted data guides the iMEM intelligence, whichtypically accesses data from memory, operates on the data, and depositsthe results of the operation in the memory, at the same or anotherlocation. Optionally, iMEM can signal the CPU via a READY or INTERRUPTsignal. If this option is implemented, it represents another departurefrom classical memory, which, with no intelligence, can never signal theuse of any operation other than access. Memory address space, as itappears to the CPU is shown in FIG. 2A. Memory address space as it isimplemented using iMEM is shown in FIG. 2B. The host CPU treats iMEMaddress ranges as pages 101, 102, 103, etc. that possess structure andthat are linked to processors 201, 202, 203. However, CPU only accessesmemory; there is no CPU direct access to the processor array. iMEMdevices are compatible with classical memory and CPUs normally accessboth memory and iMEM during operation. The location of iMEM depends onsystem memory address decoding. CPUs generally use a PCI bridge tointerface to iMEM, although the preferred iMEM implementation can alsopossess P-51-like pin-strapped address ranges for multi-iMEM addressingrequiring no external decoding logic. The structure of iMEM is shown inFIG. 3A and the individual units are shown in FIGS. 3B-3E.

While memory interfaces to intelligent I/O have been implemented in manyways, such I/O is typically limited to relatively few channels, ISDNlines, motors, storage disks, etc. iMEM, on the other hand, is limitednot by the number of extended I/O devices but by the size of the CPUaddress space. For 32 and 64 bit CPUs this can be quite large. Hereinlies much of the power and utility of the iMEM. Often orders ofmagnitude more gates are implemented in memory storage than in a CPU,say 10 gigabits of memory to 10 M gates of CPU. With classical memory,those 10 gigabits have no intelligence and do no processing. Only the 10to 100 million logic gates of the CPU process data. With iMEM, all 10 to100 gigabits of data can be actively processing in parallel with CPUprocessing, potentially offering orders of magnitude increase inprocessing power. Current 90 nm processes allow manufacturing of 175million gates/die and 65 nm processes are being developed.

iMEM distributed intelligence differs from multi-processor architecture,which typically replicates homogenous CPUs over an array structure. SuchCPUs are then programmed in similar fashion, using say, C or JAVAlanguages, which are not particularly amenable to partitioning overmulti-processors.

A primary goal behind the development of iMEM was to be hardware andsoftware compatible with all processors on the market, utilizingcurrently available tools, not requiring new tools, and operating withcurrent operating systems. While, in principle, iMEM processing could beimplemented via a CPU embedded in the iMEM device, (such as in theCybernetics P-51 device ) the preferred implementation employs acollection of Finite State Machine (FSM)-based modules as shown in FIG.3A.

iMEM architecture improves systems that tend to perform arrayoperations, or operations on many sets of data that representessentially identical elements, say atoms in a protein, or phrases in adictionary. In such cases computation performed in memory augment thepower of the CPU, possibly by orders of magnitude. In the preferredimplementation iMEM intelligence can be “hidden,” that is, the iMEMprocessing can be suspended, and iMEM reduced to classical memoryfunctionality.

iMEM Task Structure

Because many iMEM-based applications involve “many element” problems,where each element is typically represented by a data structure that isthe same for all elements, and is operated on by a set of operationsthat are also applied to all other elements, the preferred iMEMimplementation divides memory into multiple partitions, each partitioncontaining, at minimum, the element data structure. In most cases, thepartition also contains the element operations. If both element data andoperations are contained in the partition, then the partitioneffectively becomes a task. If each element possesses essentiallyequivalent data structure and operations, then the memory partitions areequal sized, and are referred to as “pages.” In FIG. 4, a page containsa task 175, consisting of task code 165, task data 160, and task status155.

In the preferred implementation, shown in FIG. 3A, the first page, page0 110, is reserved for the system, while pages 1 . . . N are dedicatedto tasks 1 . . . N (represented by the curly braces 175 ). Also, thepreferred iMEM implementation allows variable page size, where the“current” size is conveyed to the iMEM by the CPU via a “page-size”register 105 on page 0. In addition, the Tasks data/code boundary mayalso be variable, and also conveyed by CPU to iMEM via a “task-boundary”register 107 on page 0.

Because the preferred iMEM implementation supports multiple tasks 175distributed over an equal number of memory pages, the iMEM controller isdenoted MTC for Multi-Task Controller 700. In operation, the MTC selectsthe “current task” 150, accesses the task state 155, and determines theappropriate action. The preferred iMEM implementation supports at leastthe following states: Executing // if different from Ready_to_ExecuteSuspended Ready_to_execute Wait_for_resource Wait_for_ResponseInterrupting // if different from SuspendedWhen iMEM MTC detects a Suspended task, it performs no processing, butselects the “next” task, where any appropriate “next task selection”algorithm may be used.

Interrupting tasks are those that have signaled via an interrupt Requestsignal or via the task status for polled systems, that CPU attention isrequired. The CPU, upon detecting the Interrupting state, can examinefurther status info to determine the cause of the interrupt. The iMEMMTC treats tasks in the Interrupting state as if Suspended, and selectsthe next task. The CPU, upon servicing the interrupt, can change thetask state to either Suspended or Ready to Execute, as appropriate.

Suspended tasks can only be brought out of suspension via the operationof the host CPU. That is, once a task enters the suspended state in theiMEM, it remains suspended unless and until the host CPU changes itsstate by writing to (or possibly reading from) the relevantstate-register in the specific iMEM task. The host CPU accesses memoryacross the interface 125, consisting of address bus 120, data bus 122,and control bus 124.

If the MTC detects that a task is Ready_to_execute, then the MTC enablesthe iMEM Execution subsystem and this subsystem causes the relevant taskpointer to be fetched (from the task state 155 or working copy thereof330) and used to access via interconnect 420 the next task instructionfrom task code space 165.

A Ready_to_execute task, depending upon the instruction executed, canremain ready, or can be suspended, or can enter a wait state, eitherwaiting for a resource to be ready or for a result/answer/response to beavailable. The resource that iMEM tasks typically wait for is aProcessing Element, 600, and the answer that an iMEM task awaits, istypically the result of the operation performed by the ProcessingElement. This result is typically the result of a data processingoperation, computation, or search, but may be a time delay trigger orother non-data event.

As shown in FIG. 3A, the MTC 700 contains a Scheduler unit 200 thatanalyzes the task state. In the preferred implementation, the Schedulerunit selects the “next” task page (via page address bus 220) and causesthe task state to be accessed. If the Scheduler unit determines the taskis ready, it causes the task code to be fetched and enables theExecution subsystem 400.

Although the Scheduler unit supplies the “page” address 220, neither theScheduler unit nor the Execution units applies (non-page) addresses toRAM. For this purpose a “data-flow” subsystem 300 is implemented. TheDataflow unit responds to control signals 225 from the Scheduler unit,signals 425 from the Executive unit, or signals 525 from the ResourceManager unit 500, and provides handshake and/or static signals to theseunits, using the same control busses. The Scheduler unit receivestask-state information via bus 325 from the Dataflow unit and can updatetask-state info to the Dataflow unit over the same bus.

The Dataflow unit 300 manages the (non-page portion of the) address 320to RAM, the READ and WRITE and ENABLE signals 324 to RAM and the databus 322 to/from RAM. Data from the RAM is distributed to other MTCsubsystems by the Dataflow unit, as appropriate.

Although the iMEM device may contain one data Processing Element, PE600, the preferred implementation contains multiple such elements,represented by braces 675. In this case the Resource Manager unit 500manages the control of and interface to the Processing Element 600selected by the Scheduler unit PE select bus 210.

In the preferred implementation the multi-tasking, multi-processingelement controller 700, consisting of Scheduler unit 200, Executive unit400, Resource Manager unit 500, and Dataflow unit 300, provides alinkage between the current task 150 and any associated ProcessingElement (PE) 600.

The Executive unit 400 uses control bus 410 to receive signals from theScheduler unit 200, and to advise the Scheduler unit that the taskcannot execute further. A second control bus 415 is used to requesteither a Processing Element 600 or a response from a PE, as well as toconvey the results of these requests. Although these requests originatein the Executive unit and are sent to the Scheduler unit, the Schedulerunit passes the requests to the Resource Manager unit 500 via controlbusses 240 and 250, which inquire as to whether a resource or a resultis available and carry the response from the Resource Manager unit. TheScheduler unit uses the PE select bus 210 to enable a given processor.Although the connectivity is not shown in FIG. 3, the Resource Managerunit also monitors the Task select address 220 and the PE select busfrom the Scheduler unit, as is described in iMEM operations.

The Resource Manager unit 500 also receives commands from the Executiveunit over control bus 440, governing data transfers between task dataregisters and the selected Processing Element and signals the Executiveunit using bus 450 when such transfers are complete. In addition, theResource Manager unit manages all PE control and data busses as well asthe PE status bus 625, which signals the ready status of the ProcessingElement 600. In the preferred implementation, the PE control strobes arecarried on PE control bus 550, a separate bus 560 carries functioncommands and data to the PE, and another separate bus 660 carries dataand status information from the PE to the manager.

The data that flows from task data registers 160 to the ProcessingElement 600 flows through the Dataflow unit over bus 322 and hence overbus 522 to the Resource Manager unit and then bus 560 to the PE forprocessing. Results from the PE flow over bus 660 to the ResourceManager unit, then bus 522 to the Dataflow unit, and finally over bus322 to the target task data register (not necessarily the same registerfrom which the info came.) The data flows between Dataflow unit 300 andResource Manager unit 500 are coordinated via control bus 525.

Note that the Processing Element may also have an I/O bus 680 connectedto a Memory or I/O interface 690, for whatever purposes are appropriate.For example, search processes may load a specific phrase or other dataelement into the PE, as described above, and the PE may then useinterface 690 to a data base repository to perform the search or sort.

Description of iMEM Operation

Such an implementation operate as follows, in one embodiment. Thepreferred iMEM implementation utilizes an external clock and reset line.Upon power-up the device is reset and appears to the CPU as a classicalmemory. In this mode the CPU can decide upon page size and page boundary(between task data and task code) and number of tasks, then write thisinformation into the appropriate register/locations (103, 105, 107) onthe system page, page 0 110, and then proceed to initialize the iMEMtask pages by writing data to task data registers 160, code to task codespace 165, and task state to task state registers 155, on a page by pagebasis 150/175. When memory has been thus prepared, the CPU can performthe ‘wakeup’ procedure, described later, to bring the iMEM intooperation.

At this point the Scheduler unit 200 begins operating by zeroing thetask select bus 220 of FIG. 3A and then asserting ‘get task’ 1002 ofFIG. 23, which is a signal sent to the Dataflow unit over the taskcontrol bus 225. Upon receiving the ‘get task’ command, the Dataflowunit 300 begins fetching the task state from task 0, which is not a truetask but is the system control/configuration page 110. This info is thenused by the Scheduler unit to set the number of tasks present (unlesspin strapped number of tasks is used) and, optionally, set the page sizeand boundary between task data and task code (boundary =start of taskcode.) The Scheduler unit then applies the number of tasks to the taskselect bus 220 of FIG. 3A, thereby selecting the page address of the‘last’ task. (The task select bus is decremented down to zero, and whenzero is reached, the task selection recycles to the ‘last’ task, unlessanother task scheduling algorithm is used.) With the task selection onbus 220 of FIG. 3A, the Scheduler unit again re-asserts ‘get_task’signal 1002 of FIG. 23 over bus 225. The signal ‘get_task’ is cleared byhandshake on bus 225 when task state is read by the Dataflow unit.

Upon detecting the ‘get_task’signal from the Scheduler unit, theDataflow unit applies the address of the first status byte to bus 320,and appropriate memory control signals (RD and CE) to bus 324 and readsthe first byte of state information from the task state registers 155via data bus 322. Sequential accesses read the remaining task statebytes 155 and stores these bytes in the working task state registers330. The task state 1004 is conveyed to the Scheduler unit 200 via taskinfo bus 325 and the Scheduler unit 200 interprets this information.

The Scheduler unit finds the task in one of the five valid states:

-   -   Interrupting    -   Suspended    -   Ready_to_execute    -   Wait_for_resource    -   Wait_for_response If the task state is Suspended, the Scheduler        unit sequences to the next task, typically by decrementing the        task select address 218 on 220 and issuing ‘get_task’ again to        the Dataflow unit.

If the task state is Ready_to_execute, the Scheduler unit receives the‘task_PE’ info over the task info bus 325, which indicates theProcessing Element 600 in the PE array 675 that is currently linked tothe task 150, if any. If this PE is zero, no PE is selected, otherwise,if the PE_ID 216 is non-zero, the appropriate selection address isapplied to the PE select bus 210. At the same time the ‘execute’ signal1006 is asserted to the Executive unit 400 via the task control bus 410.

The Executive unit begins in the ‘idle’ state and, in response to the‘execute’ signal 2 1006, issues a ‘fetch_Code’ command 1008 to theDataflow unit 300 over task control bus 425. The Dataflow unit 300accesses the current task pointer from the working task state registers330 and proceeds, via 320, 322, 324, to fetch the task code 1010 fromtask code space 165. This code is presented to the Executive unit 400via bus 420 and the ‘got_Code’ signal 1012 is asserted by the Dataflowunit over bus 425. The Executive unit 400 then decodes the task code1010 and takes the appropriate action. Because a major use of iMEM is toprocess task register data 160 using an appropriate Processing Element600 (from PE array 675), a typical task begins by requesting a resource,indicated in the preferred implementation by ASCII task code ‘$’ 1014.

When the Executive unit detects the ‘request_resource’ instruction(‘$’), it asserts both the ‘request_PE’ signal 1016 to the Schedulerunit 200 via task control bus 410, and the ‘update_task’ signal 1018 tothe Scheduler unit 200 via the resource request bus 415 and sets its ownstate to ‘idle’ 1020, awaiting the next execution event.

The Scheduler unit, upon detection of the ‘request PE’ signal 1016 from410 issues a request, PE_avail? 1022 to the Resource Manager unit 500via the ‘PE_avail?’bus 250 and, upon detection of ‘update_task’ signal,performs the following:

The Scheduler unit de-asserts the ‘execute’ signal 1024 to the Executiveunit 400, and signals the next state=Wait_for_resource 1026 to theDataflow unit 300 via task info bus 325, while also asserting‘set_task_state’ 1028 in the task control bus 225, causing the Dataflowunit to change the task state from Ready_to_execute to Wait_for_resourcein the working state register file 330.

The Scheduler unit also passes the ‘update_task’ signal 1030 from theExecutive unit to the Dataflow unit 300, via control bus 225, causingthe Dataflow unit 300 to write the task state from working registers 330to task state registers 155 in task 150 in memory 100, via Data flowbusses 320, 322, 324.

The Scheduler unit then waits for ‘task_updated’ signal 1032 (on bus225) from the Dataflow unit. When ‘task_updated’ 1032 is seen, the nexttask is selected via task select bus 220, and the ‘get_task’ signal 1034again asserted on bus 225 to the Dataflow unit.

For ease of exposition, assume that the next task, fetched from thecollection of tasks 175, is found to be in the Wait_for_resource state1036. In this case the Scheduler unit does not assert ‘execute’ to theExecutive unit but asserts the ‘Is_PE_avail?’ signal 1038 to theResource Manager unit 500, via the PE_avail? bus 250, then wait for anacknowledgement from the Manager.

When the Resource Manager unit, which has been idle, detects the‘Is_PE_avail?’ signal on bus 250, it tests the PE Ready signals on bus625, and, if a PE is available, records this fact in Links 510 andresponds with a positive assertion Ack 1042 on bus 250, otherwise, anegative assertion results on 250, and the Resource Manager unit returnsto idle state.

If the Resource Manager unit found an available PE, then the identity ofthe PE, PE_id 1040 is returned to the Scheduler unit via 250 and theResource Manager unit ‘locks’ the PE (using Links 510) to prevent anyother task from acquiring this resource. The Resource Manager unit thenreturns to idle state and clears the ‘availability’ signals on bus 250.

When the Scheduler unit observes the acknowledgement Ack 1042 on bus250, it determines whether the PE is available or not. If not, then theScheduler unit uses bus 220 to select the next task from task set 175and proceeds. If an available PE was found, the Scheduler unit sets thetask state to Ready_to_execute 1044 (‘update_task’ 1046), asserts the‘execute’ signal 1048 on task control bus 410, and also passes the PEidentifier (PE id), via task info bus 325 to the Dataflow unit, where itis written into working state registers 330, before the task state isupdated in 155.

Because it was assumed that the task opcode ‘$’ was encountered by theExecutive unit, it is further assumed that, once the Wait_for_resourcestate returns to Ready_to_execute, the Executive unit finds aninstruction that makes use of the requested resource. A realisticexample would be the ASCII code sequence ‘+AB=C’, which indicates thatthe addition operation ‘+’ should be performed (in the PE) upon thecontents of task registers ‘A’ and ‘B’ and the result, when available,transferred to register ‘C’. We now describe the operations performedfor this sequence of ASCII codes. Upon decoding the ‘+’ opcode 1050, theExecutive unit saves the operator and begins the following.

In the preferred implementation, the current task number, which appearson 220, is seen by the Resource Manager unit (not shown in FIG. 3 [butpotentially transferred over ‘PE_avail’ bus]) and is used to ‘tag’ thePE with the task number. This is accomplished when the Executive unitissues a ‘save_tag’ signal 1052 over transfer control bus 440 toResource Manager unit 500.

The Resource Manager unit then writes the ‘save_tag’ function via 560 tothe PE using the PE control bus signal 550, followed by the‘task_select’ value 220, which is written into the PE tag register 645,of the PE selected by bus 210, where bus 210 was setup by the Schedulerunit when the resource was found to be available (and also written tothe working task state 330), so that the task has a record of which PEhas been assigned and locked to it. As a result of the above operations,the task state contains the PE identifier, and the PE contains the taskidentifier, or tag. This linkage can be used for pre-emptive scheduling,error detection or any other purpose as appropriate. Note that thelinkage is also contained in the Resource Manager unit 500 in links 510,where the lock is maintained.

Upon completion of the save tag operation (or concurrently) theExecutive unit 400 fetches the register name ‘A’ from task code space165, by issuing a ‘fetch_REG’ signal 1054 to the Dataflow unit 300 viabus 425, then issues a ‘load_PE’ command 1056 to the Resource Managerunit 500 via the data transfer control bus 440. The Resource Managerunit 500 uses the Dataflow unit control bus 525 to request data 1058 forthe PE, and, with handshaking on bus 525, expects data fetched from taskdata register ‘A’ in 160 by the Dataflow unit 300 to appear on data path522 for writing to the PE via data bus 560 under control of signals onbus 550. The Resource Manager unit continues this operation until alldata from Register ‘A’ has been loaded into the PE, either based onfixed data size or a data terminator.

Upon completion of the data transfer 1060, signaled to the Executiveunit 400 over the transfer complete bus 450, the Executive unit 400typically sends a ‘Push’ command 1062 over bus 440, which is sent to thePE via bus 560 and bus 550 to cause the PE to push the data just loadedonto the stack to make room for new data. When this transfer is completeas indicated by a signal on bus 450, the Executive unit 400 then beginsthe fetch of the next register name ‘B’ by means of fetch_reg 1064 fromtask code area 165 and the same load sequence, load_PE 1066,request_data 1068, transfer_complete 1070, as that for loading ‘A’ tothe PE is repeated.

When both ‘A’ and ‘B’ have been loaded, the Executive unit retrieves the‘+’ operator, stored at the beginning of the sequence, and sends via 440the ‘+’ function using send_op 1072 to the PE via the Resource Managerunit 560 and 550. When the transfer is complete 450, the Executive unitasserts the ‘request_Answer’ signal 1074 to the Scheduler unit, via 415,and the ‘update_task’ signal 1076 via 415, and returns to the idlestate.

The Scheduler unit, seeing the ‘request_Answer’ signal 1074 de-asserts‘execute’ using the ‘!Execute’ signal 1078 and sets the task state toWait_for_Response 1080 via 325 where it is written to 330, and passesthe ‘update_task’ signal 1084 to Dataflow via 225, thus causing the taskstate 155 to be saved for task 150. The Scheduler unit then causes thenext task to be selected using the get_task signal 1086. The response isthe task_state (‘wait_for_response’) 1088 from the dataflow unit 300.

When the above task, or another task waiting for an answer, is nextdetected, the Scheduler unit asserts the ‘is_Answer_avail?’ signal 1090over bus 240 to the Resource Manager unit 500, which, having recordedthe linkage 510 between the requesting task (currently task selected220) and the assigned PE, tests the relevant PE Ready signal 625 fromthe PE array 675, and responds ‘yes’ or ‘no’ via bus 240 based onwhether the PE is ready with an answer or not.

If the answer is not ready, the Scheduler unit advances to the nexttask. If the answer is ready as indicated by ‘ans_avail’ 1092, theScheduler unit asserts the ‘execute’ signal 1096 to the Executive unit400 and changes the task state in 330 to Ready_to_execute 1114 via taskinfo bus 325. After the Execute Unit is finished, the task state isupdated by ‘update_task’ 1116 and the ‘!Execute signal’ 1118 is issuedto the Executive unit 400.

The Executive unit 400, fetching the next task code as usual, detectsthe ‘=’ code 1098, and asserts (in the preferred implementation) a‘read_tag’ signal 1100 on bus 440 to the Resource Manager unit 500,which proceeds, via 560, 660, 550 to read the tag 645 using ‘read tag’1100, from PE 600, serving at a minimum as a check on linkage, thenExecutive unit 400 asserts ‘read_status’ 1102 via bus 440, causing theResource Manager unit 500 to read the PE status information 648 (againvia 560, 660 and 550). This status information can contain PE readystatus, error status, equality or comparison status, or other, asappropriate to the particular PEs (although heterogeneous PEs shouldstrive for identical status format, if feasible.)

Assuming that no error occurred and that the desired result was notsimply the status of the operation (‘>’, ‘=’, ‘<’) but the resultantdata, the Executive unit 400 again issues the ‘fetch_reg’ command 1102to the Dataflow unit 300 to obtain the target register (‘C’) from taskcode, then issues the ‘save_PE’ command 1106 via bus 440 to the ResourceManager unit 500.

Upon detection of the ‘save_PE’ signal 1106 (inverse of ‘load_PE’), theResource Manager unit 500 reads the answer (assumed at the top of stackin the PE) from the PE and places the data (or the first byte thereof)on data path 522, while issuing a ‘take_data_from_PE’ signal 1108 to theDataflow unit 300 via data flow control bus 525. The Dataflow unit 300,using register name ‘C’, computes the address of the target dataregister and writes the data into task data space, handshaking with theResource Manager unit 500. This operation continues until all of theanswer data has been transferred from the PE result stack 620 to thetarget register 160, then the Resource Manager unit 500 signals‘transfer_complete’ signal 1110 via bus 450 to the Executive unit 400,which asserts the ‘release_PE’ signal 1112 via bus 440 to the ResourceManager unit 500, and the ‘update_task’ signal 410 to the Schedulerunit.

When the Resource Manager unit detects the ‘release_PE’ signal 1112, it‘unlocks’ the PE 1115, that is, removes the association of the currentPE with the current task (in Links 510), thus effectively returning thePE to the pool of ‘available’ PEs.

Thus, we have executed the ASCII task code ‘$ +AB =C’ in the iMEMarchitecture.

Although iMEM supports far more functionality than described above, theoperations described are typical of interactions between Scheduler,Executive, Dataflow, and Resource Manager units and corresponding accessto memory and Processing Elements. Other operations, such as ‘copy datafrom task code space to task data register’ or ‘signal CPU via IRQ 126and Suspend task’ can be seen to be compatible with the above describedoperation, and implementable by one skilled in the art. To copy datafrom task code space to task data space involves the Executive and theDataflow units, independently of the Resource Manager unit. In the samemanner, a task code execution may involve only the Executive unit andResource Manager unit (after the task code fetch completed) such as‘initialize a PE’ or ‘request PE internal function’, etc. Finally, asuspended task is ignored by the Scheduler unit, thereby allowing theCPU to access the task's data and/or code space. After the desiredaccess has been completed, the CPU can modify the task state 155,typically setting the task state from Suspended to Ready_to_execute, atwhich point the Scheduler unit would once again begin scheduling thetask. Note that, even if the task state modification collided with thetask state access by the Scheduler unit, such that the CPU made the taskReady_to_execute immediately after the Suspended state was read, theScheduler unit does not update the task state, thereby preserving theready state until the next ‘pass’, as is normal for Ready tasks waitingto execute. FIG. 23 schematically shows the above operation withunnecessary redundancy removed.

FIG. 24 shows a flow chart of the basic state transitions of iMEM. Insteps 1122 and 1124, the iMEM waits for a Processing Element (PE) tobecome available. If a PE is available, the state of iMEM goes to ready,in step 1126. In this state, if iMEM needs to communicate with the hostCPU in step 1128, it does so and suspends itself in step 1130, waitingfor a response, as determined in step 1132. Otherwise, iMEM requests aprocessing element, in step 1134, and checks for its availability, instep 1136. If a PE is available, a link is sent to the PE in step 1138,and iMEM waits for a response from the PE, in steps 1140 and 1142. Whena response is received, iMEM returns to the ready state.

Brief Summary of iMEM Operation

The Scheduler unit selects a task/page and signals the Dataflow unit toget the task. If the task is READY, then Scheduler unit signalsExecution to execute the task code.

The Executive unit encounters a wait-for-resource instruction (viaData-flow) and signals a resource request to the Resource Manager unit,through the Scheduler unit.

If no resource is available, Scheduler unit sets the task state toWait_for_resource.

Otherwise, the Resource Manager unit (eventually) finds an available PEand signals such.

The Executive unit issues a “LINK & LOCK” command to Resource Managerunit or Dataflow units, (or both).

The Resource Manager unit “tags” or links the PE to the task by writingthe current task page to the PE (which stores the tag/link) and sets a“lock” bit or flag, maintained by the Resource Manager unit to preventsaid PE appearing available to another task.

The Dataflow unit, under control of Resource Manager unit, transferstask data to PE (or from task code to data register under control ofExecutive unit).

The Scheduler unit, in coordination with other units, commands Dataflowunit to set task state to Wait-for-Answer and update task in RAM.

The Scheduler unit then advances, via appropriate algorithms, to thenext task. Eventually, the “next task” is a task waiting for an answer.

The Scheduler unit asks the Resource Manager unit ifanswer-is-available. If not, the task continues to wait.

If so, the Resource Manager unit manages the transfer of data from theProcessing Element, PE, to the task data space in RAM, then signals theExecutive unit that the data transfer is complete.

The Executive unit tells the Resource Manager unit to release theresource (the PE) and the Scheduler unit to update the task state (toREADY). The PE returns to the “available” pool and task processingcontinues as appropriate.

The number of task instructions executed before the task is returned toREADY state is implementation dependent and should best match theimplementation to the problem. In most cases it is assumed that, at somepoint, a task may reach a state where it is appropriate to provide someresult to the host CPU. The preferred implementation signals the CPU,typically through an interrupt line, and enters the SUSPENDed state 802,awaiting CPU response, although in some cases it may be appropriate fortask execution to continue. In general, CPU/iMEM interaction iscoordinated as follows (see FIG. 5):

-   -   SUSPENDed task awaits CPU    -   CPU (reads or writes) (task data and/or code) 804    -   CPU alters task state to READY    -   READY task resumes operation/execution 806    -   Eventually task signals CPU and suspends itself        iMEM Architecture Is Both Task Code and Task Data Independent

iMEM architecture can be tailored to a specific application class. TheiMEM architecture described above is independent of task code and dataimplementations. The specific instruction coding (interpreted by theExecutive unit) and the specific data types and sizes do not affect thegeneral iMEM operation described above (except to simplifyimplementation.) For this reason task code and data implementations maybe problem specific. Although some problems may be optimally solved viasuch specificity in (task instruction and data) encoding, we specify apreferred iMEM encoding scheme that should be employed unless otherconsiderations suggest otherwise.

The iMEM operations described above are extremely general, that is,tasks execute and change state according to the events occurring duringexecution, and data is transferred from task memory to ProcessingElements and operations performed, then the results are transferred intotask memory space. Thus, a generic encoding of task operations is bothpossible and desirable.

Description of iMEM ASCII Task Code

The preferred task encoding is ASCII, that is, task instructions arerepresented by ASCII codes, including ASCII arithmetic codes, +, −, /,as well as punctuation and other ASCII symbols. The preferred datastructure is Register-based, and uses ASCII Register names, ‘A’ . . .‘Z’.

Though this naming convention implies that we have a maximum of 26 dataregisters (per task), it is consistent with the goals of the iMEMarchitecture. The ability to refer to task data registers by an ASCIIname is so powerful that limiting the register set to 26 data registersper task is acceptable. A typical iMEM application is a many-bodyproblem, typically one body per task. Such bodies can usually becharacterized by fewer than 26 parameters so that this limitation shouldnot be unduly constraining. If it is, we can double register space bymaking the register name case sensitive. Even with 26 registers (pertask), the iMEM has a larger register set than most classical and manycurrent CPUs. This task structure is shown in FIG. 6, which depicts afield for the task state 808, a task pointer 810, a task processor 812,and a task operation 814. Preferred implementations use byte wide(8-bit) task code memory, which is compatible with and accessible bymost CPUs. The width of the data registers is completely unspecified,but is typically a multiple of 8 bits.

Note that the ASCII-named registers may contain the data to be operatedon, or may contain pointers to the data to be operated on, or both.

Consider a typical ASCII encoded task instruction:‘$+AB=C’(or ‘$ A+B =C’)

The above instruction is decoded by the iMEM Executive unit as follows:‘$’ => wait for resource ‘+’ => add the two following registers ‘A’ =>send 1st Register to PE ‘B’ => send 2nd Register to PE = => wait foranswer, transfer results ‘C’ => Register for result storage ‘ ’ =>ignore spaces, used for readability

Other task code instruction(s): :B−123.456 //copy‘−123.456’ intoRegister B $(A>B) ? g : h // compare Register A to Register B, do gif >, else do h % // suspend self, wait host intervention (assert IRQ) 0// End of task code, repeat from start of task code * + − / > < & | . ˜_(—) ASCII Data Processing Operators ! ‘ : $ = ? # % @ ; \ ″ {circumflexover ( )}, ASCII System Operators [ ] ( ) { } ASCII Partition Operators0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ASCII Numeric data A B C . . . X Y Z ASCII Registernames a b c d e f g ASCII Function names h i j k I m n o ASCII IndexRegister names p q r s t u v w x y z ASCII Reserved symbols 0x01 . . .0x1A ASCII Ctrl OperatorsiMEM ASCII Data Processing

The ASCII task encoding scheme described above is data independent, ifone assumes that the host loads the data registers initially, and thenunloads them directly, and if the Dataflow unit, Resource Manager unit,and PE elements are implemented appropriately.

Thus, iMEM works, as described, with ASCII task code and binary data,but also works with ASCII data, given the same qualifications. For sometasks, such as search and sort, ASCII data is most appropriate. In othercases, such as numeric processing it is harder to determine theappropriate data format/encoding. For example, stock market prices aretypically entered as ASCII numbers and displayed as ASCII numbers. Evenif the binary computation is faster than ASCII computation, the overallcomputation speed may be slower when ASCII-to-binary-to-ASCIItranslation overhead is considered. There are also silicon or equivalentcosts involved. For typical floating point units of the type found inIntel Pentium CPUs, the data is 80 bits wide, and paths in the FPU are80-bits wide. For ASCII floating point units the internal paths are onlyfour bits wide, allowing more effective use of silicon. Thus, forexample, Intel CPUs typically contain one to four FPUs, while initialFPGA-based iMEM devices contain up to twenty-five ASCII FPUs.

Although our preferred implementation uses ASCII data and dataprocessing, there is nothing about the iMEM architecture requiring such,or precluding Unicode implementation.

iMEM ASCII Architecture

As described above, iMEM architecture supports both binary data andcode. The preferred implementation assigns upper case ASCII alphabeticcharacters as register names, and assigns ASCII operators (+, −, *, /,_, >, <, ?, !, @, #, $, etc.:, as opcodes. Because there are innumerableproblems to solve, and only a finite number of ASCII operators, iMEMspecifies a preferred operator assignment, but specific problems may bebetter served with an alternate assignment, therefore there is no strictinsistence on a particular operator interpretation in the iMEMarchitecture. For example, the “+” sign should typically cause additionto be performed in arithmetic systems, but could mean concatenations insorting applications. +AB=C +AB=C +BA=C A = 123 A = “cat” A = “cat” B =456 B = “dog” B = “dog” C = 579 C = “catdog” C = “dogcat”

Note that the arithmetic+operation is commutative, while the alphabeticoperation is not. Note also that the implementation of the Executiveunit is the same for both arithmetic and alphabetic operations but theProcessing Element performs the operations differently, as would beexpected for a computation Processing Element versus a sorting element.The preferred iMEM implementation of ASCII operations preserves to themaximum extent, the behavior of the Execution, Scheduler unit, Dataflow,and Resource Manager units and expects the Processing Element(s) tointerpret the operations appropriately. With this understanding of iMEMASCII operators, we define a default set of operations.

The default set of ASCII operators is further partitioned into two setsof operators. Operators in the first set are interpreted by theExecutive unit, while operators in the second set are interpreted by theProcessing Element. For example, the description of iMEM operationdescribed in detail the interpretation of the following instruction,$+AB=C.

In the example, the “$” is interpreted by the Executive unit as arequest for resource operation. Then, the “+” was recognized asrequiring at least two register operands, but was sent to the ProcessingElement for actual interpretation and execution. The “=” operator wasinterpreted by the Executive unit as a transfer operator, and the resultof the “+” operator was transferred from the Processing Element to thetarget register, C.

In the simplest iMEM architecture the following operators are sent to aProcessing Element for interpretation: <OPR> <Default interpretation> +Add, concatenation − Sub, difference * Mul, product / Div, partition >GT, greater than < LT, less than . Decimal Point & And, subset | Or,subset ˜ Not, outset {} Reserved _(—) Reserved

The following operators are interpreted by the Executive unit: <OPR><Default interpretation> $ Request Resource # Hexadecimal :k #75 %Request Host and Suspend = Transfer result to register ? Test for Branch@ Call register or branch indirect : Location operator ‘ Pass throughoperator (to PE) ″ String delimiter (overrides space, etc.) ( ) Scopeoperators [ ] Index operators \ Reserved ; Delimit instructions, switchtask (this task = READY ! Interrupt host or send I/O output , Separator{circumflex over ( )} Ctrl, {circumflex over ( )}A send task code = 01to Executive unitFinally, the preferred iMEM implementation also interpretsmulti-character operations.iMEM Index Registers

In the preferred implementation, the ASCII-named data registers holddata sent to or received from the Processing Elements. In addition tothese primary data registers, we implement binary index registers andassign lower case ASCII names to them. The default set of byte-widebinary index registers 816 labeled ‘h’ . . . ‘o’ are included in thetask status registers as shown in FIG. 7. Multi-byte-wide indexregisters are consistent with this scheme.

Index Registers can be initialized, incremented, decremented, andtested, and can be used to index data registers by task and to indexinto code space for branching. Examples of index register usage areshown: :n #04 // load index register n with hexadecimal value 04 n+ //increment index register n n− // decrement index register n k: $+AB = C// k is label, index register k loaded with task ptr.−> “$” @k // k isbranch target, copy index register k into task ptr.iMEM Register index Addressing

The addition of index registers supports ‘branch to label’ operation asdescribed above, and also opens the possibility of data registerindexing. In the preferred implementation, the following syntaxrepresents such indexing:

-   -   A[n] // n is task/page index for data register A

The interpretation of A[n] is that ‘n’ declares the task from whichregister ‘A’ is accessed. $+AB = C // wait resource, add A and B, waitresponse, transfer to C $+A..F = G // wait resource, sum A through F,wait result, transfer to G $+A[i]B[j] = C[k] // wait resource, add Afrom task i to B from task j, wait result, transfer to C of task k.In each of the above expressions, the system operator “$” causes thesystem to wait for an available Processing Element, then to fetch thedata operands from the relevant named data registers, send theseoperands to the Processing Element, and tell the Processing Element toperform the data operation “+”. It is significant that no assumptionshave been made about the nature of the data operands, or the nature ofthe “+” operation. The system is assumed to be able to fetch data fromnamed data registers, and copy results to a named register, and theProcessing Element is assumed to be able to perform the “+” operation.It does not matter whether an arithmetic operation is performed onbinary data, or on ASCII decimal data or whether concatenation isperformed on ASCII data strings, the iMEM systems behave in essentiallythe same manner.

Because all tasks share the same register structure, addressable byalphabetic characters ‘A’ through ‘Z’, the same letter can refer to thesame register on all pages, and the index register allows the actualtask/page from which the register is to be accessed to be specified. Inorder to accomplish this type of indexing, there needs to be a mechanismthat can alter the ‘page’ address 820 during the access, then restorethe current task page address for continued task code execution. Such amechanism is shown in FIG. 8. In this implementation, the indexed pageaddress 346 is sent from the Dataflow unit 300 and multiplexed bymultiplexer 800, under Dataflow unit control signal 345, with the systempage address provided by the Scheduler unit 200.

An alternative use of indexed addressing could be used to select aparticular Processing Element as follows:

-   -   $[n]+AB =C wait for resource n, add A and B, wait response,        transfer to C        In this case, the $ resource request is immediately followed by        an index operation specifying the address of the Processing        Element desired. (Alternatively, control characters can address        PEs.) This assumes heterogeneous elements and is generally        unnecessary for homogeneous Processing Elements. Because the        preferred implementation uses homogeneous elements, we assume        such in the following. Excluding the case of indexed Processing        Element addressing, the register indexed addressing can be        interpreted in the Dataflow unit, per se. The advantage of such        interpretation is that there is no necessary flow between task        code memory, the Dataflow unit, the Execution system, and back        to the Dataflow unit, all of which takes time, measured in clock        cycles.

Performing register indexing in the Dataflow unit allows much fasteroperation than would the same interpretation in the Execution system,and leads us to consider what other operations can or should beperformed in the Dataflow unit. One such operation is the hexadecimalnumeric operator, which follows an index register specifier and precedesnumeric value to be stored in said index register. As described above,:n#03 is interpreted to mean that index register n is to be loaded withhexadecimal value 03, which produces the value 00000011 and stores it inindex register n. The interpretation of each of the ASCII characters inthis sequence can be performed by the Dataflow unit, again avoiding thenecessary handshaking between the Dataflow and Execution subsystems, andthereby speeding up the process considerably. Note that, except for thesimple hex-to-binary conversion, the necessary operations are alladdressing and data access operations, and therefore properly belong inthe Dataflow unit. With this in mind, we also examine the operationsassociated with using index registers to hold label addresses, and withsubsequent use of such to facilitate branching in task code. For taskcode spaces of 256 bytes or less, the label address itself can be storedin the index register, while for larger task code spaces, relativeaddressing is preferred, unless the default memory width is greater than8 bits, in which case absolute addressing may be preferred. In any case,these addressing operations are fetched from memory by the Dataflowunit, the relevant index register and task code addresses computed, andeither the relevant task code address is stored in the specified indexregister, for labels, or the contents of the specified index register(the branch target in @n) is accessed, and copied into the working taskpointer register, for branching operations. These addressingmanipulations, accesses, and modifications are all naturally performedin the Dataflow unit, with no necessary help or intervention from theExecution system.

Distributed ASCII Operator Interpretation

The consequence of the above description is as follows. We earlierspecified a two set ASCII code interpretation mechanism, in which someASCII codes were interpreted by the Execution subsystem, and some weresent to the Processing Element subsystem to be interpreted. If we addthe index register based operations described above, we see that abetter implementation is the novel three partition distributed ASCIIcode interpretation just seen. In this scheme, we include the Ctrloperator, {circumflex over ( )}, which operates on capital ASCIIalphabetic characters, ANDing the letter with 10111111 to clear the 6thbit, producing a result from 0x01 to 0x01A, denoted by Ctrl-A throughCtrl-Z, which operators are to be interpreted by the Execution subsystemin the preferred implementation. However, we see that the compaction ofthe two ASCII characters can be performed in the Dataflow unit, whichnow recognizes the {circumflex over ( )} character, fetches the nextalphabetic character, clears bit 6, and sends the resultant Ctrlcharacter to the Execution system to be interpreted.

The three operator sets for distributed ASCII code processing aresummarized. In the preferred IMEM architecture the following operatorsare sent to a Processing Element for interpretation: < Operator > <Default interpretation > + Add, concatenation − Sub, difference * Mul,product / Div, partition > GT, greater than < LT, less than Decimalpoint & And, subset | Or, superset ˜ Not, outset { } Reserved _(—)Reserved (underscore)

The following operators are interpreted by the Executive unit: <Operator > < Default interpretation > $ Request resource % Request hostand suspend = Transfer result to register ? Test for branch : Locationoperator followed by data register specifier ‘ Pass through operator (toPE). ″ String delimiter (overrides space, etc.) ( ) Scope operators \Reserved ; Delimit instructions, switch task (this task = READY) !Interrupt host or send I/O output , Separator

The following operators are interpreted by the Dataflow unit: <Operator > < Default interpretation > ‘h’ .. ‘o’ Index registerspecifiers [ ] Index operators # Hexadecimal :k #75 or :A#75FE32 etc{circumflex over ( )} Ctrl, {circumflex over ( )}A sends task code = 01to Executive unit ({circumflex over ( )}B=02, etc) @ branch indirectthrough index register : Location operator followed by index registerspecifierThe processing of all ASCII operators, both system and data operationsshould be executed in the same way over all preferred implementations.The scheme is illustrated in FIG. 8, in which ASCII operators are shownin the subsystem in which they are interpreted. iMEM architecture iscompatible with any number of ASCII mappings. For instance, in the aboveexample the characters ‘<’, ‘>’ are interpreted by the computationalProcessing Element as less than and greater than. Another implementationcould treat ‘<’ and ‘>’ as XML delimiters to be interpreted by eitherthe Execution subsystem or the Processing Element, etc.

Note also that the ‘Pass-through’ operator can be either “command bycommand” or toggle, that is, the pass-through operator can cause onecommand to be sent to the current PE, or can cause all followingcommands to be sent to the PE until the next pass-through operatortoggles the pass-through mode, returning control to normalexecution/interpretation mechanisms. In this way, the iMEM architecturecan effectively support multiple “languages,” wherein each separatelanguage is addressed to an appropriate Processing Element.

ASCII iMEM Data Independence

As discussed above, the use of ASCII task codes and ASCII Registernames, does not require the use of ASCII data, but is compatible withalmost any data type, from ASCII numeric to binary numeric to image maps(.BMP, etc.), voice waveforms, etc., assuming that the data registershave appropriate capacity. In preferred implementations, task dataregisters are 16 bytes long, but they could easily be one, two, four, oreight bytes long, or much longer. Register size can be implementationspecific, or can be specified as part of the task state info for eachtask.

In addition to register size, the task page size and the boundarybetween task data and task code (=start of task code) can be variable,and included in the task state info for each task. Although thepreferred implementation uses fixed size pages, allowing the Schedulerunit to ‘randomly access’ tasks, variable page sizes could be supportedby the Scheduler unit following links from the current task to the‘next’ task, using the page info in the task state to compute the end ofthe current task and the start of the next. If ‘random-like access’ isrequired, the Scheduler unit can build a task address table as each newtask is encountered, thus allowing access to any (already encountered)task regardless of varying task sizes.

In addition to task state, task data, and task code segments on eachpage, iMEM can support other segments such as symbol table, stackstorage, or object template segments, etc. The preferred mechanism forsupporting additional segments is by extension to the list of pointersand counters as shown in FIG. 9. FIG. 9 shows the page 0/system page. Ifsegments are sequential, then successive sizes are sufficient to definenumerous segments per task. With fixed page size, these configurationparameters I, J, K, L, M, and N are located on the system page 900,where I is the word size in bytes, J is the number of words perincrement, K is the number of tasks in the iMEM, L is the number ofincrements per page, M is the number of increments per data register,and N is the number of data registers, which number can be used tocompute the offset to the task code section that follows the dataregisters. Note that for one gigabyte of RAM and a page size of 4Kbytes, the Scheduler unit can support approximately 250,000 tasks.Conversely, for pages of 256 K bytes, the Scheduler unit could support 4K tasks. It can be seen that the fixed page size, system-page-basedconfiguration parameter table is indefinitely flexible.

iMEM Data Path Width and Unicode Implementations

Because the iMEM configuration is defined via specific parameters on thesystem page, these parameters can by redefined and iMEM reconfigured byhost CPU software. A major architectural question having to do with suchdynamic reconfiguration concerns the basic data path width. If the pathwidth varies, there must be corresponding variation in the memory, theDataflow unit, the Resource Manager unit, and the Processing Elements,whereas if the data path is constrained to a fixed word size, with onlythe number of words variable, then changes in iMEM are confined to theProcessing Elements, with few, if any, changes required in memory,data-flow, or Resource Manager unit circuitry. Note that a byte widepath quite naturally supports any ASCII data types, while alsosupporting 8-, 16-, 32-, 64-, or N-byte binary data types. Although thesequential handling of byte-wide data consumes greater time than widerpaths, the silicon (or other substrate) requirements are less, so it maybe feasible to trade-off data flow speed for compensating gains in thenumber of tasks and/or Processing Elements. The preferred iMEMimplementation therefore uses byte wide data paths, but any width datapath is compatible with iMEM, as long as all data handling circuits areimplemented appropriately. Note also that a 16-bit memory and data pathwidth supports Unicode data and instructions in the same natural mannerthat the 8-bit architecture supports ASCII coding. Thus, a preferred16-bit architecture is Unicode-based with all ASCII operations preservedfrom the preferred 8-bit implementation. The same data independenceapplies to Unicode implementations as to ASCII implementations.

Alternative Dataflow Organization

The iMEM architecture described above uses the Dataflow unit to handleaddresses to memory, memory control signals and memory data access, andpresents the data to the Resource Manager unit, with handshaking.

An alternative memory access mechanism involves the Resource Managerunit signaling the Dataflow unit to supply the relevant address tomemory while the Resource Manager unit takes control of the memorycontrol signals 560, 562, 564 and data bus 522, as shown in FIG. 10. Inthe preferred implementation the Dataflow unit 300 maintains byte-wideaccess 350 to memory 100 (to preserve ASCII task codes), while datatransfers between memory and Processing Element(s) can be anyappropriate width. The data bus can enter the Resource Manager unitmodule or can connect directly to the processor bus, with processor buscontrol signals managed by the Resource Manager unit. In this manneriMEM becomes largely data path width independent, in that taskscheduling and task code execution do not depend directly on data pathwidth.

ASCII Code Hierarchy

In addition to the distribution of native ASCII operator interpretationover three subsystems described above, iMEM devices can support at leasttwo levels of ASCII code interpretation, native code at the task codelevel, via iMEM architecture implementation, and higher level code atthe task data level, whereby the interpretation of ASCII commands storedin task data registers is performed by either the ASCII task code perse, the Processing Element hardware, or both. In this sense, ASCIIcommands read from task data space correspond to a ‘high levelinterpreted language’, while ASCII task code read from task code spacecorresponds to ‘native code’, which corresponds to binary executables inclassical CPU architecture. For clarity, we stress that the iMEM ASCIInative task code differs from classical CPUs in that the interpretationof the ASCII opcodes is performed directly by logic, with no binaryexecutables involved, unlike classical CPUs in which ASCII commands areassembled or compiled into binary executables and linked and loaded intoCPU code space.

In FIG. 11, the high level code, shown in register A, is price(“IBM”)and the low level task code 165 is $ [i] 'A=X. iMEM begins executing thetask code by fetching the resource request, $, and noting that the nextcharacter is the bracket, [, indicating an index is required. iMEM thenfetches the index, i, and uses the result to request the specificresource 600, PE[i]. The task then waits until PE[i] is available, thetask resumes, and the next task code, ', is fetched. This, in thepreferred implementation, is the pass-through operator, which should befollowed by either a data register name or a quote string. The effect of'A is to passes the contents of the data register A to PE[i], where itis interpreted. In this case, PE[i] searches for the price of IBM stock.Because iMEM assumes that data register pass-through commands produceresults, the task then enters the Wait_for_response state. (Note:pass-through quote strings do not wait for result.) When PE[i] finds thestock price, it signals such, and the task then copies the price intoregister X, as indicated by the task code. In this fashion iMEM nativeASCII task code is interpreted by Execution hardware, while higher levelapplication code is interpreted by Processing Element(s).

ASCII iMEM Compiler-Less Architecture

ASCII iMEM devices do not require compilers or assemblers, since ASCIItask code is executed directly by the iMEM hardware, with nointermediate forms required. Because Assemblers, and Compilers are CPUand Operating System specific, this is a major advantage of iMEM.Because literally all modem computer systems provide some type of ASCIIeditor, iMEM is thus compatible with all CPUs and OSs, not simply thosefor which iMEM compilers have been written.

Although single character names are convenient from an executionperspective, the use of longer alphabetic or alphanumeric names can besupported in a simple fashion by using the register ‘image’ on thesystem page 900, page 0, to hold multi-character names, thus system pageregister ‘A’ holds the (terminated) string name for task register ‘A’,and so forth. This scheme works for array operations in which all tasksoperate on data in the same way, and all task data registers have thesame meaning across tasks. For example if register ‘Q’ holds theelectric charge for every task, then system register ‘Q’ can hold theASCII string ‘charge’ identifying the type of data in all Q-registers.Based on this scheme, shown in FIG. 12, iMEM hardware can translatestring names to register names and register names to string names, for“friendlier” programming. The actual iMEM task code that executes shouldalways use the single character register names. In the default iMEMimplementation, the CPU is assumed to setup both data registers and taskcodes, however standalone iMEM implementations, which allow programinput from I/O channels, could use task register name strings, whileconverting actual task code to single character names. Thus, forexample, for task code containing 26 or fewer independent variables,iMEM could build and scan the system page ‘symbol tables’ to translatearbitrary variable names to single character ASCII register names,allowing iMEM execution.

iMEM ASCII Translation

The iMEM Dataflow unit is used to fetch the task code from code space,upon receipt of the ‘get_Code’ signal from the Executive unit. Becausethe Dataflow unit also reads the task status 155 into the working taskstate registers 330, Dataflow can also look at the task state value,and, if the state is Ready_to_execute, can access the task pointer and‘prefetch’ the task code. This capability offers a significant ASCIItranslation capability to iMEM architecture. An example is describedbelow and illustrated in FIG. 13.

The System page, page 0, can be used to hold ASCII multi-character namesfor iMEM task data registers as described above. Following the registerson the system page, is system space available for task code support. Inparticular, multi-character ASCII commands can be stored in this space,followed by a specific byte of code to be described. These commands canbe used to translate ASCII commands in task code space as follows.

When the Dataflow unit loads a Ready_to_execute 910 task state, itfetches the task pointer and prefetches, in step 912, the task code byteand the ‘next byte’. If the task code byte is a valid iMEM code,typically an operator or punctuation character, as determined in step914, the fetch terminates and, in step 932, it is sent to the executionunit. However, if the task code is an alphabetic character (reserved forRegister names or labels) and the ‘next byte’ is also alphabetic, asdetermined in step 914, then the Dataflow unit assumes that the taskcode space holds (at least one) multi-character ASCII command thatrequires translation. The Dataflow unit then continues to prefetch, instep 916, alphabetic bytes until either a space byte, 0x20, or a bytewith bit 7 set is encountered, as determined in step 920.

If the byte following the command has bit 7 set, as determined in step920, then the Dataflow unit determines that this is actual task code tobe presented to the Executive unit, when the ‘get_Code’ signal, in step918, is asserted.

If the byte following the command is a space character, as determined instep 920, then Dataflow assumes that the System Page contains a table ofASCII commands followed by single bytes with bit 7 set, and proceeds tosearch, in step 922, the System page for the matching command. (Notethat Dataflow must zero the Page address from the Scheduler unit whileaccessing System page.) The Dataflow unit searches the System page taskcode space for a character that matches the first byte of the commandand continues scanning as long as the bytes match. If the first mismatchoccurs, as determined in step 924, when the space character isencountered in the task code, then the corresponding byte in Systemspace is assumed to be the single byte code with bit 7 set, and, afterconfirming, in step 926, that bit 7 is properly set, the Dataflow unitaccesses the code, and writes it into the current task code page,overwriting, in step 928, the space character. In this way, a singlesearch is required to translate the multi-byte ASCII command in thecurrent task code space into a single byte used by the Executive unit.Thus, the next time the Dataflow prefetch mechanism encounters themulti-character ASCII code, it reaches, not the space, but the singlebyte with bit 7 set, as determined in step 920, and therefore does notinitiate the search of the System page. In the ideal case, the prefetchoccurs, in step 912, while the rest of the system is otherwise occupied,and requires little, if any, additional time for handling the multi-bytecommands. Note that this mechanism allows the host CPU to build thetranslation tables in the System page in support of ASCII command taskcoding. Alternatively, in the standalone version, these tables areimplemented in non-volatile memory. In anticipation of re-configurabletechnologies, the system can use bit 6 of the special code todistinguish between interpretation by the Executive unit and ProcessingElement as follows.

If bit 6 of the special code is zero, the Executive unit can interpretthe code. If bit 6 is set to one, then the Executive unit can send thetask code to the Processing Element through the Resource Manager unit,for interpretation and execution. In this way the iMEM architecture andscheduling and execution mechanisms can be preserved, while theProcessing Elements can be reconfigured and programmed from task codeusing meaningful ASCII commands set up by the CPU in the System pagetranslation table.

It is obvious that one skilled in the art could extend these mechanismsin various ways in support of the hardware ASCII code translationprocess, eliminating the need for the compiler technologies normallyassociated with such execution.

The iMEM CPU Task Index Register

The Task Index Register 180, on the CPU side of the memory 100,corresponds to the Page address register on the MTC side of the memory,in that it selects the page to be accessed by the lower address bits. Asshown in FIGS. 14A and 14B, the Task Index register can be loaded fromthe address bus 120, or the data bus 124, as appropriate, via CPUcontrol of the Index latch signal 182. After the Task Index register 180has been loaded, all CPU addresses appearing on the address bus accessthe Task Index-selected page of memory. In a segmented architecture,such as the Intel 386 and compatible CPUs, it is then feasible to createa segment corresponding to task status, another segment corresponding totask data, and another corresponding to task code space, such that thesethree segments always access the desired segments of the current task,where the current task, from the CPU perspective, is selected by theIndex register, as shown in FIG. 15.

In systems that poll for IMEM interrupts by reading the task statusregister and examining the task state instead of using a hard interrupt,the Index register may be implemented using a pre-settable counter, suchthat the counter can be loaded from a data or address bus as describedabove, or can be loaded with pin-strapped information. The counter 940of FIG. 15 can then be incremented (or decremented) via a signalproduced by the output of a comparator 942 that compares the low addressgenerated for a CPU read instruction with the on-page address of thestatus register, thus facilitating a polling scan of each task's statusby the CPU without the necessity of having the CPU modify the contentsof the index register between tasks. If the counter 940 is an up/downcounter, then the normal behavior consists of a read of a task statethat is not interrupting, followed by the auto increment (say) to thenext task page, where the read is repeated. If the state is found to beinterrupting, then the Index register now has selected the next page,not the interrupting page, therefore the CPU can immediately decrementthe counter to return to the interrupting page. Since it is assumed thatmost tasks are not interrupting at a given time, then this is the mostefficient way to scan.

iMEM Standalone Architecture

The CPU-based iMEM depends upon a host CPU to initialize memory andawaken the iMEM device. A standalone (hostless) iMEM optionallyself-awakens and self initializes. Self-awakening requires littleexplanation. All devices that begin functioning after a power-on-reseteffectively self-awaken. Self-initialization is also quite common and isultimately based on non-volatile storage of initial code and data,including status data. Such non-volatile info is either directlyaccessed upon startup, or is copied into working RAM for operation.

Standalone iMEM devices either perform fixed functions, requiring noexternal program input, or require a program input channel 950, as shownin FIG. 16. The program input channel and subsystem 950 must minimallyprovide the following functionality:

-   -   Establish communication channel(s) and support communication        protocol(s);

Provide RAM address selection (and address auto-increment) function(s);and

-   -   Provide RAM data write operation to download code and data to        iMEM.

Alternatively, a more intelligent program input subsystem recognizes theiMEM task structure, and supports ‘per task’ programming vs. simplywriting to specified RAM locations.

The distribution of ‘program input’ intelligence between iMEM and theprogram input subsystem is arbitrary. The program input subsystem canautonomously setup communications, download task state, code, and data,and then awaken iMEM, just as a host CPU would behave, or the iMEM canself-awaken, self initialize, optionally attempt to open a communicationchannel (or wait for one to be opened), and then wait for program inputfrom the channel. These and other standalone iMEM support mechanisms areobvious to one skilled in the art.

An abundance of communication interfaces, including USB, ISDN, Ethernet,Wireless, and even UART and PS/2 Keyboard interfaces are feasible insupport of iMEM standalone operation. With these power-up changes, iMEMcan function in a standalone manner, with no CPU, or loosely coupled toa CPU via said communications channel.

iMEM Arrays

iMEM architecture is designed to add true intelligence to memory, inorder to support CPU-based systems in ways not before possible.Specifically, one host CPU can support multiple iMEM devices, up to thelimit of the CPU address space, using the CPU address bus.

Although iMEM distributed intelligence differs from multi-processorarchitecture, iMEM standalone arrays can be implemented, with eitherheterogeneous Processing Elements or homogeneous Processing Elements.iMEM devices can be linked in arrays similar to other Klingmaninventions, such as P-51 Chains, (U.S. Pat. No. 6,021,453) and N-cellarrays (see U.S. Pat. No. 6,789,212 titled “A BASIC CELL FORN-DIMENSIONAL SELF-HEALING ARRAYS”, Attorney Docket No. 372614-03701)due to the fact that iMEM Processing Elements optionally support asecond interface 690 in FIG. 3A, either directly or through a sharedswitching module, allowing iMEMs, either hosted or standalone, to becascaded or chained in the P-51 manner (see U.S. Pat. No. 6,021,453,titled “MICROPROCESSOR UNIT FOR USE IN AN INDEFINITELY EXTENSIBLE CHAINOF PROCESSORS WITH SELF-PROPAGATION OF CODE AND DATA FROM THE HOST END,SELF-DETERMINATION OF CHAIN LENGTH AAND ID, (AND WITH MULTIPLEORTHOGONAL CHANNELS AND COORDINATION PORTS”) In addition, the use ofASCII data reduces the data port widths in a manner desirable for use in‘N-cell’ architectures. (see U.S. Pat. No. 6,789,212 titled “A BASICCELL FOR N-DIMENSIONAL SELF-HEALING ARRAYS”, Attorney Docket No.372614-03701). These ‘vertical’ and ‘horizontal’ array options are shownin FIGS. 17A and 17B, respectively.

Because iMEMs support an arbitrary number of Processing Elements, andeach PE can optionally support another memory interface, then each PEcan support a ‘downstream’ iMEM device, which can, in turn, support amultiplicity of PE-hosted iMEMs, and on, ad infinitum. An iMEM tree canbe constructed limited only by practical concerns such as cost or power‘consumption, but architecturally unlimited. In this manner, iMEMbranching arrays can be constructed with either homogeneous orheterogeneous Processing Elements, and with or without each PEsupporting a downstream iMEM device. That is, any one of a given iMEM'sProcessing Elements can host another iMEM or not, on a PE-specificbasis. This net-like architecture, shown in FIG. 18, becomes even morepowerful when re-configurable PEs are considered.

Re-Configurable iMEM Architecture

The data format and data handling portions of iMEM can varysignificantly from implementation to implementation. These can be ‘hard’variations, in which a fixed data type is specified at powerup, alongwith appropriate data Processing Elements, or ‘soft’ variations suchthat configurable logic technology allows ‘on-line’ modification to datastructures, data types, data-flow, and data-processing logic. Because,in theory, infinitely variable logic systems essentially unconstrainimplementation architecture, to be useful, in a design sense, one mustconstrain architectures that are intended to interface naturally totoday's CPUs, but that should also be capable of evolving to takeadvantage of expected technological advances, particularly in the areaof dynamic reconfigurability.

In expectation that real-time re-configurable logic circuitry isessentially unlimited in its application, such that portions of thelogic can be statically fixed, while other portions can be dynamicallyreconfigured, either on a cycle by cycle basis, for synchronouscircuitry, or module by module, for asynchronous systems. Those portionsheld fixed are used to implement iMEM control architecture, while thechanging circuitry implement the data processing, and data-flow,portions of iMEM, as shown in FIG. 19. The preferred implementation ofiMEM reconfigurable architecture preserves the interpretation andexecution of iMEM ASCII System operators by the Execution subsystem,while reconfiguring one or more Processing Elements to re-interpret theiMEM ASCII Data operators (+−*/˜& |. _). Reconfigurable implementationssupport both homogeneous and heterogeneous Processing Element arrays.The shaded portion of FIG. 19 represents reconfigurable subsystem(s).

iMEM Clock Domains

The least frequently invoked signals tend to be the signals between theScheduler unit and the Executive unit, which typically occur at thebeginning and end of a task invocation.

In contrast, the data transfer operations and their management, occurfrequently, almost constantly, therefore the events should betriggered/clocked as frequently as possible.

“As frequently as possible” means that the maximum changes occur percycle, and this maximum is two, since we can effect transitions on bothpositive and negative edges of the clock.

Therefore, part of the iMEM architecture concerns the distribution ofclock domains over the system. In terms of current technology, thisimplies, optimally, a single ‘external’ clock with synchronousconnectivity, as is well understood by those skilled in the art. Interms of future technology, asynchronous modules, almost ‘islands’ inlogic space, may exist with no global clock, and iMEM clocking should becompatible with such.

In all clocking schemes, iMEM uses ‘parallel’ clocking for transitionsbetween less frequently invoked systems/modules, and uses‘anti-parallel’ between frequently invoked and interacting modules, asshown in FIG. 20. The direction of the arrow in each module indicatesthe clock edge upon which transitions occur. Tasks represent a dual-portwrapper around RAM and hence show different clock edges. In particular,in one embodiment, the PEs are clocked on the rising edge, the resourcemanager unit on the falling edge, the scheduler unit and executive uniton the rising edge, the dataflow unit on the falling edge, the iMEM sideof the memory on the rising edge and the host side of the memory on thefalling edge.

iHidden:

Although not necessary to the iMEM architecture, it is very desirablethat the iMEM intelligence be hidden unless explicitly desired. Thus,the preferred implementation of the iMEM appears as a classical memoryupon power-up, and requires activation by the host CPU before assumingany intelligent behavior.

Such activation could, of course, derive from external pins that the CPUmanipulates through CPU I/O port(s) in the manner that PCI memoryinterface devices are made visible. (PCI configuration space).

The use of I/O ports is generally undesirable, and, in the case of alarge number of iMEM devices in a system, even more so. For this reasonthe preferred “wakeup” method for iMEMs is classical memory compatible.That is, the algorithm applied to an iMEM awakens its intelligence,while the same algorithm applied to a classical memory has no unusualeffect.

The “Wakeup” Algorithm

The preferred “wakeup” algorithm 952 for iMEM devices consists of aseries of specific memory accesses to a specified memory address. Forexample and according to FIG. 21, assume that address 16 in the iMEMaddress space is first read in step 954, then a known sequence of bytesis written to the same address, say “(C)2000 ε Klingman,” as indicatedby steps 956 to 960. If this procedure is followed exactly, the iMEMawakens, and expects all relevant configuration information to exist inmemory. Thus, before the wakeup algorithm is executed, the host CPU isexpected to write relevant iMEM information into the memory.

After awakening, the iMEM performs any necessary testing on memoryconfiguration data, and possibly other self-tests, and writes a summarybyte, in step 960, to the special address 16. Thus, the CPU, afterperforming the above algorithms, can delay for a short specified timeduration and then read address 16, in step 962, in iMEM space. If thevalue is ASCII ‘n’, the last value written by the CPU, then the memoryis a classical memory, and does not exhibit intelligence. If the CPUreads a byte other than ‘n’ from address 16, then the CPU can concludethat an iMEM occupies this address space, and, further, can determinethe status of the iMEM after it has completed memory checks and selftests. This final CPU read of address 16 fully awakens the iMEM device,which begins task processing according to the information previouslywritten to the iMEM by the CPU, as shown in FIG. 21.

Although this sequence of iMEM access by the CPU is extremely specificand nonrandom, nevertheless, it is (somewhat) conceivable that the CPUcould read address 16 in iMEM space, then, quite by accident, write thespecial 16 bytes to this address, and finally even read address 16, thusinadvertently awakening the iMEM. To almost completely eliminate thispossibility, the preferred iMEM implementation further checks to seethat no address other than 16 is seen from the first read to the lastread, including the 16 writes.

Processing Element Interface

As discussed earlier, the width of the data path from memory toProcessing Element is unspecified, but the preferred implementation usesan 8-bit data path. The following specification describes a preferredASCII Floating-Point Computation Unit Processing Element interface. Theinterface consists of an eight-bit bi-directional data bus and thefollowing control signals: unit_ready 970 output unit_select 972 inputfunc_write 974 input data_read 976 input data_write 978 inputAnd the following internal structures:

-   -   Tag_register 980    -   Function register 982    -   Status register 984    -   Accuracy register 986    -   Data register stack 988

In the preferred iMEM implementation, the Scheduler unit subsystemcontrols an array of unit select control signals, one per ProcessingElement. The Resource Manager unit controls the func_write 974,data_read 976, and data_write 978 signals, these three signals beingshared by all Processing Elements, but only the selected ProcessingElement (the one receiving unit_select 972) responding to said signals.In similar fashion, the 8-bit bi-directional data bus 975 is shared byall Processing Elements, with every Processing Element except theselected one driving the data bus into the high impedance state. EachProcessing Element controls a unit_ready signal 970, with all suchsignals monitored by the Resource Manager unit.

During operation, if the Resource Manager unit determines that a givenProcessing Element is ready, and the specific Processing Element hasreceived unit_select 972, the Resource Manager unit drives a functioncode onto the data bus 975, and asserts the func_write 974 strobe. Thefunction code is written into the Processing Element where it isinterpreted and used to specify the nature of the current transaction.The Resource Manager unit then removes the function code from the databus 975. If a data read operation is being performed, the ResourceManager unit places the data bus 975 in the high impedance state, andasserts the data_read control signal 976, causing the Processing Elementto drive the appropriate data onto the data bus 975. If a data writeoperation is being performed, the Resource Manager unit asserts thedata_write control signal 978, and causes the data source to place dataon the data bus 975 to be written to the selected Processing Element,where it is handled according to the function specified in the precedingstep. The relevant signal timing and register structure is shown in FIG.22.

Although the present invention has been described in considerable detailwith reference to certain preferred versions thereof, other versions arepossible. Therefore, the spirit and scope of the appended claims shouldnot be limited to the description of the preferred versions containedherein.

1. A computing system comprising: one or more processing elements, atleast one processing element operative to interpret a first subset ofoperators and perform specified operations on data; a memory having afirst interface for connecting to a host processor and a secondinterface, the memory being divided into a plurality of logicalpartitions, including at least one task page containing the state of atask, wherein the first interface includes a task page mechanism with anindex register, the mechanism providing access by the host processor tothe memory; and a multi-task controller (MTC) that includes a schedulerunit, a data flow unit, an executive unit, and a resource manager unit,each unit coupled to the other units, wherein the data flow unit isconfigured to transfer data between the second interface of the memoryand one of either the scheduler unit, the executive unit, or resourcemanager unit, wherein the scheduler unit is coupled to the secondinterface of the memory and scheduler unit and the resource manager unitare each coupled to the one or more processing elements, wherein theresource manager unit is configured to find an available processingelement for carrying out a function of a task and to assign a processingelement to a current task by providing a linkage between said availableprocessing element and the task, wherein the scheduler unit isconfigured to select a task as the current task, to obtain the state ofthe current task, and select an assigned processing element to carry outa function of the current task, the scheduler unit also having a taskpage register; wherein the executive unit is configured to decodeinstructions relating to a task and request the resource manager to setup a processing element to carry out a function of a task; and whereinthe number of processing elements and number of tasks are independent ofeach other.
 2. A computing system as recited in claim 1, wherein thescheduler unit, the data flow unit, executive unit and resource managerunit are implemented as finite state machines.
 3. A computing system asrecited in claim 1, wherein the first interface includes an address busthat is partitioned into a high address part and a low address part, thehigh address part being supplied to the index register whose output isconnected to the memory and the low address part being supplied directlyto the memory by the host processor.
 4. A computing system as recited inclaim 1, wherein the index register is loaded under the control of alatch signal derived from the host processor, the signal causing signalsat the input to the index register to be latched and held at the outputof the index register so as to select a current task for the hostprocessor access.
 5. A computing system as recited in claim 3, whereinthe signals at the input to the index register are supplied by the hostprocessor data bus.
 6. A computing system as recited in claim 3, whereinthe signals at the input to the index register are supplied by the hostprocessor address bus.
 7. A computing system as recited in claim 1,wherein the index register output has the same width as the task pageregister so as to divide the memory into pages that are identical insize, as seen by the host processor connected to the first interface andthe multitask controller connected to the second interface.
 8. computingsystem as recited in claim 1, wherein the task page mechanism includes:a comparator that indicates on its output a comparison of the lowaddress generated during a host processor read instruction with theon-page address of the status register; and a presettable counter thatcan be incremented or decremented by a signal produced by the output ofa comparator so as to facilitate a polling scan of each task's status bythe host processor without the necessity of having the host processormodify the contents of the index register between tasks.